智术师Antilogic论证思想探微  

Antilogic:A Sophistical Art of Argumentation

作　　者：陆品超 Lu Pinchao(College of Philosophy,Nankai University,Tianjin 300350,China)

机构地区：[1]南开大学哲学院

出　　处：《科学．经济．社会》2022年第2期88-101,共14页Science Economy Society

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重大项目“八卷本《中国逻辑史》”(14ZDB013);贵州省哲学社会科学规划国学单列课题“中国逻辑的思想基础、核心概念与理论体系研究”(20GZGX19)。

摘　　要：在《斐德罗篇》和《斐多篇》中,柏拉图强烈谴责了智术师名为antilogic的论证方法。亚里士多德在《形而上学》卷四中呼应了柏拉图批判,认为这种方法违反了不矛盾律,这促使他踏上了开创逻辑学的征途。传统解读将antilogic视同为强辩术或辩证法的做法是不妥的,研究表明,antilogic式论证具有集体废止型的可废止推理特征。它是普罗塔戈拉“双重逻各斯”学说在论证领域的实践,反映了智术师在面对信念冲突时的处理手段。它的恰当使用既能胜任智术师正反权衡、评判是非曲直的探究需要,也能满足他们在公共生活中实现合理且有效说服的修辞需求。In Phaedrus and Phaedo,Plato strongly condemns sophists’ method of argumentation-antilogic.This criticism is echoed in Metaphysics IV where Aristotle worries about its’ violation of the principle of non-contradiction and thus,dedicated to developing the discipline of logic.Traditional interpretations confuse antilogic with eristic or dialectic in Plato’s dialogue.The research results show that antilogic is a distinctive art of argumentation whose logical structure is characterized by its“collective defeat”type of defeasible reasoning.It is the practice of Protagoras’ s“two logoi”doctrine,and reflects sophists’ treatment when confronting with conflicting beliefs.The proper use of antilogic suffice sophists’ need both as a inquiring method weigh the pros and cons in decision-making,and as a rhetorical tool to pursue a successful persuasion without ignoring the reasonable construction of argumentation.

关 键 词：antilogic 智术师 柏拉图 亚里士多德 不矛盾律 

分 类 号：B81-0[哲学宗教—逻辑学]